Prev: Re: [FT] Who said Nova cannon's were unbalanced? Next: [FT] MT missile control

Re: anti fighter missiles

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>
Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 11:30:18 +1000
Subject: Re: anti fighter missiles

G'day guys,

Here's some rumblings from the deep (Derek):

With all this conversation about anti-fighter missile rules I thought I
would repost this, it comes from my house rules for MT missiles:

"Optional rule: If desired, players can use salvo missiles as a
long-range
missile defence. During the salvo missile launch phase, players
launching
salvo missiles may, if desired, use a salvo to attack missiles. Nominate
that the salvo is being fired in anti missile mode and place the salvo
as
normal, within range and arc restrictions so it is within attack range
of
the target missile. During the point defence fire phase (phase 7) these
salvo missiles can attack the nearest missile within its attack range.To
resolve this attack roll 1D6-1 per salvo for the number of missiles on
target, if the final score is less than one then there are no missiles
on
target from that salvo and it's a clean miss. If there are missiles on
target roll a D6 and add that number of missiles to the score rolled, if
the final result is 6 or greater then the target missile is destroyed."

As you might guess this can be extended to include fighters as well, the
fighters can get a chance to secondary move out of the way, but they do
this at the cost of their endurance (CEF). To determine the how many
fighters are 'shot down', no change to the method described above. If
the
result is 6, one fighter killed, 7, two fighters, 8, three fighters and
so on.

Another option is for players to resolve the salvo missile anti
missile/fighter attacks immediately after placement of all salvo
missiles
in the LAUNCH SALVO MISSILES phase. This would preclude the fighter
groups
getting their secondary move but allows the anti missile/fighter fire to
be
resolved in one phase (the LAUNCH SALVO MISSILE phase) and not broken up
before and after ship movement (less counters to track).

This is not as efficient as some of the anti-fighter SML PDS rules
suggested but it is a secondary function, you wouldn't want the SM to
have
the same level of effectiveness in a secondary backup mode as a
dedicated
anti fighter/missile system.

Derek

------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538
HOBART 
TASMANIA 7001
AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax (03) 6232 5199 International +61 3 6232 5199

email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au


Prev: Re: [FT] Who said Nova cannon's were unbalanced? Next: [FT] MT missile control